Impact of margin status at 37 months after robot assisted radical prostatectomy

Canadian Journal of Urology

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 6043-6049

  Warner, Jonathan N ^a   Nunez, Rafael N ^a   Mmeje, Chinedu O ^a   Colby, Thomas V ^a   Ferrigni, Robert G ^a   Humphreys, Mitchell R ^a   Andrews, Paul E ^a   Castle, Erik P ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

Margin length; Margin location; Positive surgical margin; Prostatectomy; Recurrence

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; PATHOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE TUMOR; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROBOTICS; SURVIVAL RATE; TIME; TUMOR RECURRENCE; UNITED STATES;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARIZONA; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROBOTICS; SURVIVAL RATE; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84860232118     PISSN: 11959479     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Bergstralh EJ et al. Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organ-confined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1997;50(5):733-739.
2. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB et al. A multivariate analysis of clinical and pathological factors that predict for prostate specific antigen failure after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1995;154(1):131-138.
3. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Tomaszewski JE, Wein A. Prostate specific antigen outcome based on the extent of extracapsular extension and margin status in patients with seminal vesicle negative prostate carcinoma of Gleason score < or = 7. Cancer 2000;88(9):2110-2115.
4. Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M et al. Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2007;70(5):965-969.
5. Epstein JI, Carmichael MJ, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Influence of capsular penetration on progression following radical prostatectomy: a study of 196 cases with long-term follow up. J Urol 1993;150(1):135-141.
6. Epstein JI, Partin AW, Sauvageot J, Walsh PC. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 1996;20(3):286-292.
7. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 1993;71(11):3582-3593.
8. Epstein JI, Pound CR, Partin AW, Walsh PC. Disease progression following radical prostatectomy in men with Gleason score 7 tumor. J Urol 1998;160(1):97-100.
9. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM et al. Impact of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer recurrence and the use of secondary cancer treatment: data from the CaPSURE database. J Urol 2000;163(4):1171-1177.
10. Hashimoto Y, Skacel M, Adams JC. Association of loss of epithelial syndecan-1 with stage and local metastasis of colorectal adenocarcinomas: an immunohistochemical study of clinically annotated tumors. BMC Cancer 2008;8:185.
11. Ochiai A, Sotelo T, Troncoso P , Bhadkamkar V, Babaian RJ. Natural history of biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy based on length of a positive margin. Urology 2008;71(2):308-312.
12. Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW, Goto Y, Scardino PT. Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1995;154(5):1818-1824.
13. Paulson DF. Impact of radical prostatectomy in the management of clinically localized disease. J Urol 1994;152(5 Pt 2):1826-1830.
14. Swindle P, Eastham JA, Ohori M et al. Do margins matter? The prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2008;179(5 Suppl): S47-S51.
15. van den Ouden D, Bentvelsen FM, Boeve ER, Schroder FH. Positive margins after radical prostatectomy: correlation with local recurrence and distant progression. Br J Urol 1992;72(4):489-494.
16. Yossepowitch O, Bjartell A, Eastham JA et al. Positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy: outlining the problem and its long-term consequences. Eur Urol 2009;55(1):87-99.
17. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM, Sigal BM, Johnstone IM. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 1999;281(15):1395-1400.
18. Shikanov S, Song J, Royce C et al. Length of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of biochemical recurrence. J Urol 2009;182(1):139-144.
19. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Kaul S et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: contemporary technique and analysis of results. Eur Urol 2007;51(3):648-657.
20. Stephenson AJ, Wood DP, Kattan MW et al. Location, extent and number of positive surgical margins do not improve accuracy of predicting prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2009;182(4):1357-1363.
21. Aydin H, Tsuzuki T, Hernandez D, Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Positive proximal (bladder neck) margin at radical prostatectomy confers greater risk of biochemical progression. Urology 2004;64(3):551-555.
22. Fesseha T, Sakr W, Grignon D, Banerjee M, Wood DP Jr, Pontes JE. Prognostic implications of a positive apical margin in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1997;158(6):2176-2179.
23. Obek C, Sadek S, Lai S, Civantos F, Rubinowicz D, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins with radical retropubic prostatectomy: anatomic site-specific pathologic analysis and impact on prognosis. Urology 1999;54(4):682-688.
24. Pettus JA, Weight CJ, Thompson CJ, Middleton RG, Stephenson RA. Biochemical failure in men following radical retropubic prostatectomy: impact of surgical margin status and location. J Urol 2004;172(1):129-132.
25. Laurila TA, Huang W, Jarrard DF. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic and radical retropubic prostatectomy generate similar positive margin rates in low and intermediate risk patients. Urol Oncol 2009;27(5):529-533.
26. Schroeck FR, Sun L, Freedland SJ et al. Comparison of prostate-specific antigen recurrence-free survival in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing either radical retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2008;102(1):28-32.
27. Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS et al. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2007;178(6):2385-2389.
28. Ficarra V, Cavalleri S, Novara G, Aragona M, Artibani W. Evidence from robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2007;51(1):45-55.
29. Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Graefen M et al. Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology 2005;66(6):1245-1250.
30. Guru KA, Perlmutter AE, Sheldon MJ et al. Apical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: does technique matter? J Endourol 2009;23(1):123-127.
31. Sofer M, Hamilton-Nelson KL, Civantos F, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins after radical retropubic prostatectomy: the influence of site and number on progression. J Urol 2002;167(6):2453-2456.
32. Watson RB, Civantos F, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urology 1996;48(1):80-90.
33. Freedland SJ, Aronson W, Presti JC Jr et al. Should a positive surgical margin following radical prostatectomy be pathological stage T2 or T3? Results from the SEARCH database. J Urol 2003;169(6):2142-2146.